Why limit tournament size and computer analysis?

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

EDIT: and btw, there's nobody more real the Bill Friggin' Murray!

But who says we can't do 1000-player tournaments?

chess.com does.

And what's the reason?

"for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

Why are platinum and diamond members still limited to 100-player tournaments and diamond members to 100-game computer analysis? There seems to be no reason for the first because Chess.com's official tournaments have hundreds (often over a thousand) players! The second point is not too rational because people rarely reach the 100 limit, unless there's a lot of live chess.

Any organization needs limits.

Explain

if we had no limits, it would be anarchy!

just imagine if i could make a tournament with as many people as i wanted. the entire website would go insane! chess pieces would start eating each other! white would change to black and black to white! dogs and cats living together! pure chaos for sure.

be real.

for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.

EDIT: and btw, there's nobody more real the Bill Friggin' Murray!

But who says we can't do 1000-player tournaments?

chess.com does.

And what's the reason?

"for the obvious reason that it could be taken advantage of in various ways. you really don't see how a limit is necessary? really?

if you don't, then let's start our tournament of 10,000 people and you can get every tournament game analyzed for us on the chess.com computer.